The Lost Jedi: People React to Mark Hamill's Claim That Joe Biden Is...
'Biden's Newest Handler': #EarthDay Brought Biden and AOC MUCH Closer Together (Caption Th...
Another Win: Judge Rules That Donald Trump's $175 Million Bond Stands
Leftist Protestor Harasses Alec Baldwin Until He Majorly Loses His Cool
UCLA School of Medicine’s Woke DEI Chief Caught Plagiarizing
Sen. John Fetterman: Add Some Tiki Torches and It's Chartlottesville
Rebekah Jones Has Dyed Her Hair and Now Fancies Herself a Phoenix Rising
Brisbane Schoolgirls Afraid to Use Restroom After Their Spaces Were Converted to 'Unisex'...
Pro-Israel Professor Barred From Entering Columbia's 'Liberated Zone' for His Own Safety
Scientific American Looks at Misinformation Being Used Against Transgender People
'I Paid the Price for Their Inaction': Jewish Student Stabbed in Eye at...
Axios, WaPo Praise Speaker Mike Johnson for His Courage and Bravery
A Tale of Two College Experiences for Jewish Students Summed Up in One...
Dancing, Pizza, and Calls to Exterminate Jews: NYT Plays the 'Mostly Peaceful' Card...
NBC News Correspondent Assures Us Campus Protests Are Mostly Peaceful

Peter Strzok (yes, that one) laments 'the corrupt transformation of our criminal justice system' after Kevin Clinesmith pleads guilty

These are dark times for the cause of justice. At least according to Peter Strzok:

Advertisement

What, exactly, is Strzok’s beef?

That’s it in a nutshell. From the Lawfare piece Strzok is pimping:

Ironically, the Clinesmith charges were filed at the same time that the Justice Department awaits a ruling on its motion to dismiss the case against Flynn—for lack of materiality. The department tied itself into knots to argue that Flynn’s lies were immaterial. Yet, strangely, it gives no such benefit to Clinesmith.

We wonder why these Flynn defenders—led by the president and the attorney general—have not lifted their voices on behalf of Clinesmith. Proof of materiality seems weaker in Clinesmith’s case than in Flynn’s. The CIA email that Clinesmith altered stated accurately that Page was “not a source” but that he was an “operational contact,” that is, someone with a relationship with the CIA. Clinesmith’s alteration arguably clarified the adviser’s relationship with the CIA rather than obscuring it, though this does not excuse his misrepresentation.

In the real world, these details about Clinesmith’s email do not defeat the materiality requirement—especially given that, as we have noted, materiality is typically easy to prove. But the arguments made in defense of Flynn would also seem to apply to Clinesmith. If we applied the ridiculous standard used by the Justice Department in the Flynn case to Clinesmith, then his alteration was similarly not material.

Advertisement

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement